|Appears in Collections:||Management, Work and Organisation Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||Counter-rhetoric and sources of enduring conflict in contested organizational fields: A case study of mental health professionals|
health and social care integration
|Citation:||Fincham R & Forbes T (2019) Counter-rhetoric and sources of enduring conflict in contested organizational fields: A case study of mental health professionals. Journal of Professions and Organization, 6 (3), pp. 342-356. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joz013|
|Abstract:||As a means by which actors justify beliefs and practices, rhetoric has a key institutional role. In contested settings, where multiple groups and the logics associated with them interact, research has highlighted rhetorical strategies that exploit rival systems. The account we develop expands on these ideas and suggests they embrace forms of counter-rhetoric, or arguments that delegitimize a rival’s logic and refine and reframe others’ values. We use these categories to explore the case of a local mental health service, an area of health policy known for problematic diagnosis and treatment. Here groups of medical and social-care providers were required to work together in a system of intensive inter-professional relations and clashing logics. Our analysis focuses on this interaction, exploring the language-based nature of logics and sources of conflict between logics that are asserted in counter-rhetorical forms.|
|Rights:||This item has been embargoed for a period. During the embargo please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study. This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Journal of Professions and Organization following peer review. The version of record Robin Fincham, Tom Forbes, Counter-rhetoric and sources of enduring conflict in contested organizational fields: A case study of mental health professionals, Journal of Professions and Organization, Volume 6, Issue 3, October 2019, Pages 342–356 is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joz013|
|JPORevisions.pdf||Fulltext - Accepted Version||501.22 kB||Adobe PDF||Under Embargo until 2021-10-06 Request a copy|
Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.
This item is protected by original copyright
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.